It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
originally posted by: ParasuvO
a reply to: hellobruce
Nah he meant that anyone can clearly see plain as day that the same plane did NOT hit the Pentagon, since we have never seen any clear evidence at ALL of a plane AT the pentagon.
Care to show us any evidence of a plane at the pentagon save for pictures of parts that do not fit the narrative that were taken 2 weeks or more later ?
originally posted by: ParasuvO
Care to show us any evidence of a plane at the pentagon save for pictures of parts
originally posted by: scottyirnbru
For the doubters, could anyone of you tell me how many people need to be involved to organise and carry out this utterly massive cover up? Once you've hypothesised a number, can you explain why it's managed to stay silent?
originally posted by: Informer1958
a reply to: wmd_2008
I think Mr Cole needs a refresher on how scale models WORK & building design.
That is your opinion.
Care to demonstrate scientifically how Mr Cole examples are all wrong?
Nobody was allowed to inspect or examine any of those parts we were shown. How do we know they are authentic when we cannot view them? We are forced to take the word of a bunch of known liars, and that is not scientific in the least.
originally posted by: MALBOSIA
a reply to: Dragoon01
So Al Pachino did it!?!?!?
He paid the port authority to bury the evidence, paid the 9/11 commision to not investigate, dodged a million man hours of FBI investigation and gave NIST a deal they couldnt refuse?!?!?
Holy cow!!! Does Joe Pesci know about this?
originally posted by: ParasuvO
a reply to: hellobruce
Nah he meant that anyone can clearly see plain as day that the same plane did NOT hit the Pentagon, since we have never seen any clear evidence at ALL of a plane AT the pentagon.
Care to show us any evidence of a plane at the pentagon save for pictures of parts that do not fit the narrative that were taken 2 weeks or more later ?
originally posted by: Salander
Nobody was allowed to inspect or examine any of those parts we were shown.
How do we know they are authentic when we cannot view them?
originally posted by: Informer1958
The fact is, the FBI was on TV stating the plane crashes were not investigated.
originally posted by: Informer1958
a reply to: samkent
The parts were inspected and the serials matched up.
Source please.
The fact is, the FBI was on TV stating the plane crashes were not investigated.
An American Airlines mechanic identifies the part with serial number on the Pentagon lawn: (photo source: "Pentagon 9/11" 911files.info...)
The fact is, the FBI was on TV stating the plane crashes were not investigated.
September 16, 2001: Usual Investigative Procedures Not Followed in Examining Flight 93 Wreckage
A report suggests the crash site of Flight 93 is being searched and recorded in 60 square-foot grids. [NEWS JOURNAL (WILMINGTON, DE), 9/16/2001] This approach is preferred by Wallace Miller, the local coroner, and Dennis Dirkmaat, a forensic anthropologist involved in searching the crash site.
According to journalist and author Jere Longman, “The distribution patterns developed from such precise marking of airplane parts, remains and personal effects might have told them such things as exactly how the airplane struck the ground. Theoretically, by associating the location of particular remains with the location of parts of the airplane, they may have also gained some clues about which passengers had rushed the cockpit.”
However, almost a year later Longman reports that this approach was not followed: “The FBI overruled them, instead dividing the site into five large sectors. It would be too time-consuming to mark tight grids, and would serve no real investigative purpose, the bureau decided. There was no mystery to solve about the crash.
Everybody knew what happened to the plane.” [LONGMAN, 2002, PP. 262] While the FBI claims there is no mystery, some news articles suggest the plane was shot down. (For example, [PHILADELPHIA DAILY NEWS, 11/15/2001; INDEPENDENT, 8/13/2002] ) In addition, at the time of this decision, investigators are still considering the possibility that a bomb might have destroyed the plane (see September 14, 2001). Unlike every other major airplane crash in modern history, no National Transportation Safety Board (NTSB) investigation is being conducted into the crash of Flight 93 (see After September 11, 2001). [LAPPE AND MARSHALL, 2004, PP. 40-41]
Entity Tags: Federal Bureau of Investigation, Wallace Miller, Dennis Dirkmaat
originally posted by: Dragoon01
originally posted by: MALBOSIA
a reply to: Dragoon01
So Al Pachino did it!?!?!?
He paid the port authority to bury the evidence, paid the 9/11 commision to not investigate, dodged a million man hours of FBI investigation and gave NIST a deal they couldnt refuse?!?!?
Holy cow!!! Does Joe Pesci know about this?
Spare me.
I didnt say the mob DID it! I said the building may have been poorly constructed and so when the planes hit them they collapsed in a manner that was not consistent with how they were designed. They failed because of the poor construction.
Thats a completely different animal than your stupid strawman assertions.
originally posted by: firerescue
a reply to: Informer1958
The fact is, the FBI was on TV stating the plane crashes were not investigated.
You are right FBI doesn't investigate planes crashes. That is job of NTSB (National Transportion Safety Board) They investigate crimes
Hijacking aircraft and crashing it into buildings is a crime....